learning from administrative experience

7
Learning from Administrative Experience Author(s): Michael E. McGill Source: Public Administration Review, Vol. 33, No. 6 (Nov. - Dec., 1973), pp. 498-503 Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Society for Public Administration Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/974560 . Accessed: 15/06/2014 11:39 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. . Wiley and American Society for Public Administration are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Public Administration Review. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:39:48 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Upload: michael-e-mcgill

Post on 21-Jan-2017

213 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Learning from Administrative ExperienceAuthor(s): Michael E. McGillSource: Public Administration Review, Vol. 33, No. 6 (Nov. - Dec., 1973), pp. 498-503Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Society for Public AdministrationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/974560 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 11:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Wiley and American Society for Public Administration are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve andextend access to Public Administration Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:39:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW

into these little boxes should test that tolerance.) II. A. Review the information on the grid (where

you are with your learning), B. Identify those areas you would like to

concentrate on or develop. C. Develop a strategy for getting there,

and D. State your estimated time of arrival (ETA).

(Be specific as possible and think about how you can commit yourself to follow through.)

into these little boxes should test that tolerance.) II. A. Review the information on the grid (where

you are with your learning), B. Identify those areas you would like to

concentrate on or develop. C. Develop a strategy for getting there,

and D. State your estimated time of arrival (ETA).

(Be specific as possible and think about how you can commit yourself to follow through.)

III. Reinforcemnet and clarification-now, if

you're serious about what you've done, I suggest you get with another colleague and share the data

emerging from this exercise. As a last step make a one year contract with each other including your learning objectives, where and when you will get them met, and how you will pay for them.

Be specific. You'll be surprised how much more realistic plans become when you develop concrete

objectives, timetables, and resources; particulary when you share them with another person.

III. Reinforcemnet and clarification-now, if

you're serious about what you've done, I suggest you get with another colleague and share the data

emerging from this exercise. As a last step make a one year contract with each other including your learning objectives, where and when you will get them met, and how you will pay for them.

Be specific. You'll be surprised how much more realistic plans become when you develop concrete

objectives, timetables, and resources; particulary when you share them with another person.

Notes Notes

1. Malcolm Knowles, The Modem Practice of Adult Education (New York: Association Press, 1970), p. 317. This book is excellent reading for any teacher who deals with students over three years old. After all, adults are getting younger every year.

2. Ibid., p. 38. 3. Ibid., p. 39. 4. David R. Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, and Bert-

ram B. Masia, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook II: Affective Domain (New York: David McKay Company, 1964), p. 3.

5. Ibid., p. 6. 6. Ibid., p. 7. 7. Jay Hall, "The Use of Instruments in Laboratory

Training," American Society for Training and De-

1. Malcolm Knowles, The Modem Practice of Adult Education (New York: Association Press, 1970), p. 317. This book is excellent reading for any teacher who deals with students over three years old. After all, adults are getting younger every year.

2. Ibid., p. 38. 3. Ibid., p. 39. 4. David R. Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, and Bert-

ram B. Masia, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook II: Affective Domain (New York: David McKay Company, 1964), p. 3.

5. Ibid., p. 6. 6. Ibid., p. 7. 7. Jay Hall, "The Use of Instruments in Laboratory

Training," American Society for Training and De-

velopment Journal (May 1970), p. 50. 8. From a letter to the author from Anthony Pearson,

former general manager, Scientific Methods, May 7, 1971.

9. Warren Bennis, Organization Development, Its Nature, Origins and Prospects (Reading, Mass.: Ad- dison-Wesley, 1969), p. 2.

10. Wendell L. French and Cecil H. Bell, Jr., Organization Development, Behavioral Science Interventions for Organization Improvement (Englewood Ciffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1973), p. 44.

11. See the recent report by John R. P. French and Robert D. Caplan on "Organizational Stress and Individual Strain" in The Failure of Success, Alfred Morrow (ed.) (Amacon, 1972), pp. 30-66.

velopment Journal (May 1970), p. 50. 8. From a letter to the author from Anthony Pearson,

former general manager, Scientific Methods, May 7, 1971.

9. Warren Bennis, Organization Development, Its Nature, Origins and Prospects (Reading, Mass.: Ad- dison-Wesley, 1969), p. 2.

10. Wendell L. French and Cecil H. Bell, Jr., Organization Development, Behavioral Science Interventions for Organization Improvement (Englewood Ciffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1973), p. 44.

11. See the recent report by John R. P. French and Robert D. Caplan on "Organizational Stress and Individual Strain" in The Failure of Success, Alfred Morrow (ed.) (Amacon, 1972), pp. 30-66.

LEARNING FROM ADMINISTRATIVE EXPERIENCE

Michael E. McGill, Southern Methodist University

LEARNING FROM ADMINISTRATIVE EXPERIENCE

Michael E. McGill, Southern Methodist University

Not since the post-World War II era has adult education enjoyed the level of interest and invest- ment in evidence throughout the country today. More than ever, adults from all manner of occupa- tions are seeking educational experiences beyond their formal, degreed preparation in and outside of educational and occupational systems. Public ad- ministration, as a professional field, has played a

leading role in this resurgence of interest in

continuing adult education. The tremendous growth in the number and

scope of executive and management development programs, in-service training, over the last 15 years has excited public administrators about continuing their education. The more recent expansion of and emphasis upon educational incentives has made it possible for administrators to take advantage of

Not since the post-World War II era has adult education enjoyed the level of interest and invest- ment in evidence throughout the country today. More than ever, adults from all manner of occupa- tions are seeking educational experiences beyond their formal, degreed preparation in and outside of educational and occupational systems. Public ad- ministration, as a professional field, has played a

leading role in this resurgence of interest in

continuing adult education. The tremendous growth in the number and

scope of executive and management development programs, in-service training, over the last 15 years has excited public administrators about continuing their education. The more recent expansion of and emphasis upon educational incentives has made it possible for administrators to take advantage of

opportunities for continuing their education. Cur- rently, there is every indication that this interest and investment in continuing education is on the increase among students and practitioners of pub- lic administration.1 It seems appropriate, there- fore, at this time and in this forum to address our concerns over the character of continuing educa- tion for public administrators.

Current interest in continuing education for public administrators is based on certain critical assertions/assumptions about the needs of admini- strators, how those needs might best be met, and the effects of meeting those needs. These asser- tions/assumptions may be thought of as the "Why?" "How?" and "What for?" of continuing education in public administration. Our purpose in these few pages is to briefly examine these

opportunities for continuing their education. Cur- rently, there is every indication that this interest and investment in continuing education is on the increase among students and practitioners of pub- lic administration.1 It seems appropriate, there- fore, at this time and in this forum to address our concerns over the character of continuing educa- tion for public administrators.

Current interest in continuing education for public administrators is based on certain critical assertions/assumptions about the needs of admini- strators, how those needs might best be met, and the effects of meeting those needs. These asser- tions/assumptions may be thought of as the "Why?" "How?" and "What for?" of continuing education in public administration. Our purpose in these few pages is to briefly examine these

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1973 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1973

498 498

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:39:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CONTINUING EDUCATION

assertions/assumptions for their comprehensive- ness and competence in identifying and meeting administrative needs through continuing educa- tions. We will suggest a complement to continuing education for public administrators which we will call "Learning From Administrative Experience."

Why Continuing Education?

Interest in continuing adult education for pub- lic administrators represents one contemporary response to the age-old concern of our field. That concern is best expressed by the question, "What do administrators need to be more effective?" It is asserted (assumed) that what administrators need in order to be more effective is more education. Administrators need education that is remedial, relevant, and/or renewing, education that con- tinues beyond their formal academic preparation for their administrative roles.

Continuing education may be remedial in the sense that it provides administrators with needed knowledge or skills which were erroneously ex- cluded from their formal schooling. As an ex- ample, not all administrative curricula include coursework in organizational change, although the more progressive schools have long recognized this as a critical arena of administrative expertise. Continuing education may be relevant in the sense that it meets those educational needs of adminis- trators which they saw as meaningful only after assuming their administrative duties. The know- ledge and skills of grantsmanship are illustrative of continuing education responding to the admin- istrative need for relevancy. Finally, continuing education responds to the renewal needs of public administrators, offering knowledge and skills which have been discovered/developed since the completion of an administrator's education. Envi- ronmental management, PPBS, new legislation all represent content of continuing education as renewal.

At heart, the popular assertion is that whatever the specific educational needs of individual admin- istrators - remedial, relevant, or renewal - the ef- fectiveness of all administrators can be enhanced through continued education. In spite of the absence of significant supporting data, we are prepared to assume (with the rest of the field it appears) that the rightness, relevance, and recency of an administrator's education do impact upon his effectiveness. In this light, continuing educa- tion remains an important pursuit for public administrators. However, we are not prepared to

assert or to assume that the educational needs addressed by continuing adult education, i.e., remediation, relevance, and/or renewal, represent all the learning needs of administrators, nor even the most general needs. Let us elaborate on this

important point. We would not deny that the educational prepa-

ration of many administrators is lacking in many respects; many administrators have so admitted themselves. Numerous, perhaps countless, are the administrators who find themselves with responsi- bilities which neither they nor their educators anticipated, and for which they are, therefore, ill- or unprepared. Finally, almost daily new data are discovered and new skills are developed which promise to enhance administrative effectiveness. What is problematical about these educational needs of public administrators is that they are in constant flux, changing from one administrator to another, and, even more significantly for a single administrator, changing from one experience to the next. Indeed, the only constant in an adminis- trator's experience is that he will have experiences in which he will be expected to act effectively. In

large measure his capacity for effective action

depends upon his capacity for learning from his own experience as the context most immediate and, therefore, important to him. Thus, while different administrators at different times will have needs for remedial, relevant, and/or renewal education, all administrators at all times have a need to learn from their experience(s).

The need to learn from his experinece does not supplant the administrator's needs for remedial, relevant, and/or renewal education; it transcends those needs. The administrator who learns from his experience can better make the critical choices regarding those knowledges and skills he really needs and thereby maximize the effectiveness of continued education. Only the administrator can make these choices, they cannot be made for him. Therefore, if continued education is to contribute to public administrators' effectiveness, administra- tors must first be capable of learning from administrative experience. Can this capability be developed within the framework of current con- tinued education? We think not. The following section on the "how" of continued education explains our position.

How Continuing Education?

It would be foolhardy to attempt in the short span of these pages to review the myriad of ways

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1973

499

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:39:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW

in which continued education has been pursued in

public administration. A focus on the learning theories underlying continuing education in public administration is both more manageable and more

meaningful. Learning theories have typically been of two broad types: learning through external

conditioning and learning through cognitive prob- lem solving.2 These theories have been no less evident in continued education in public admin- istration than they have in other fields.

External Conditioning

Learning through external conditioning has a

long tradition in public administration education and training. All forms of stimulus-response condi-

tioning or learning involve complete control of the

goals, environment, and instruments by the teach- er or trainer. The learner is treated as a subject whose behavior, verbal and other, is at issue - at-

titudes, values, and other variables within the

subject are irrelavant.3 Behavior is changed by conditioning the subject to respond in prescribed ways to external stimuli.

External conditioning has been used widely in

public administration to teach job behaviors in

response to a variety of stimuli: policy, procedur- al, and technical. Examples are rampant in such diverse fields as basic job skills, managerial prac- tices, budgeting, computer programming, environ- mental management, and social responsibility pro- grams. The theory is practiced throughout admin- istrative education before, during, and beyond the

job. Moreover, learning through external condi-

tioning has proven itself to be an effective means of internalizing new behaviors and is prescribed and promoted by administrators and administra- tive educators alike.

Learning through external conditioning is not without its costs, however. Of greatest concern to us here is that learners come to be adapted to and

dependent upon a given environment (experience and educator), and uable to learn under conditions when the environment is ambiguous or changing, and/or the educator is absent.4 In the context of

public administration this suggests that learning through external conditioning will lead to effective administrative behavior only where the conditions

confronting the administrator are identical to those surrounding his learning. Learning through external conditioning does not enable the adminis- trator to learn from his own experience and, hence, may frustrate rather than enhance effective behavior. All too many of our current continuing

education efforts are modeled after the external

conditioning theory of learning, although an alter- native model has recently become popular.

Cognitive Problem Solving

Learning through cognitive problem solving emphasizes the learner setting his own goals and/or

developing collaborative, interdependent environ- ments which facilitate such goal setting. The thesis is that learning and achievement are greatly effect- ed by whether an individual sets a goal for himself and what he sets as a goal.5 Collaboratively, with others who have also set goals, the learner sets about learning those data and skills which will enhance his achievement.

Learning through cognitive problem solving is

currently enjoying great popularity as a model for

training and continued education in public admin- istration. One particularly sees cognitive problem solving in management and organization develop- ment programs and educational designs patterned broadly after the laboratory training model. Much of this popularity stems from the common concep- tion of cognitive problem solving as a model for "student-centered learning" or "trainee-centered training."

Here again, effectiveness of the learning model comes at a cost. With cognitive problem solving the costs are two-fold. First, all too often in

programs employing the problem-solving model, learning, the goal, becomes subordinate to goal setting and achievement, the means. Such displace- ment undermines both the quality of learning and the transferability of learning from one

goal-achievement cycle to the next. A second cost of cognitive problem solving as a

model for continuing education in public adminis- tration emerges with the realization that not all administrative contexts offer opportunity for the collaborative, interdependent environments requir- ed for learners to set their own goals and work toward their achievement in cooperation with others. In fact, most administrative contexts seem to promote competitive, dependent, and/or count-

erdependent behaviors. Neither model for continuing education for

public learning through external conditioning nor

learning through congnitive problem solving en- hances the administrator's capacity to learn from his own experience. Both learning models rely upon specific contingencies for their effectiveness, and in so doing bind the administrator's learning and his effectiveness to a similar set of

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1973

500

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:39:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CONTINUING EDUCATION

contingencies. Continuing education, in this pat- tern, may lead to internalization of effective job behaviors, but internalization is not synonymous with learning.6 Internalization diminishes aware- ness of experience, awareness of one's own actions with the environment and the effects of one's action. To the extent that the administrator is less aware, he is less effective.

What is needed to enhance administrative effec- tivenss is a model for learning from administrative

experience. Such a model is not now present in

continuing education in public administration as we indicate above. One such model has emerged in theoretical form and may be adapted for our purposes. This model has been called "experiential learning."

Experiential Learning

Kobler was one of the first to argue that the two traditional learning theories were not descrip- tive of all the ways in which people learn.7 A third kind of learning exists. This third kind of learning has received its most expansive articulation in William Torbert's recent and important book, Learning From Experience: Towards Conscious- ness. (Torbert's writing provided the impetus for most of what appears in these pages.) As Torbert

speaks of it, experiential learning "involves becom-

ing aware of the qualities, patterns, and conse- quences of one's own experience as one exper- iences it."8 Learning from experience is not

contingent upon external stimuli or environmental specifics. It is contingent only upon the learner's capacity to experience and to learn, a capacity which administrators can develop and use to enhance their effectiveness. The "how" of learning from administrative experience is explained below.

Kolb, Rubin, and McIntyre in their introduc- tory text, Organizational Psychology: An Exper- iential Approach, advance a simplified theory of learning which can be used with Torbert's work, as a framework for learning from administrative experience.9 The theory is graphically demonstrat- ed by the "learning cycle":

Concrete r Experiences

Active Experimentation

Observation and Reflection

Abstract Generalization

In this perspective learning from experience is a continuous four-stage cycle: (1) a concrete exper- ience is followed by (2) observation of and reflection upon the experience toward (3) forma- tion of abstract concepts and generalizations from which come (4) hypotheses to be tested by the learner in future action which in turn leads to new

experiences. The simplicity of the learning cycle in visual

and verbal form belies the intricacies of its implementation in attempting to learn from ex- perience. For example, we all have experiences but few of us experience our experiences. Torbert posits that there are four different but related levels of human experience: (1) the world outside, (2) one's own behavior, (3) one's internal cogni- tive-emotional-sensory structure, and (4) con- sciousness.1 0 We tend to be aware, to experience, only one level at a time. If I am aware of what you are saying, it is difficult for me to be aware, at the same time, of what I am doing and also what I am feeling. Consciousness is that level of experience or state at which I am fully aware of all levels in the moment.

An administrator involved in a difficult negotia- tion may be so intent on what his adversary is saying that he becomes oblivious to his own behavior and his own feelings and their effects. Processing the event at a later point, his learning will be confined to what was said, since that was the level at which he experienced the interchange (the world outside). There is very little oppor- tunity for him to act more effectively in sub- sequent interchanges because of the constraints on his learning imposed by his own experiencing.

Torbert suggests some disciplines which can enhance experiencing. Space allows us to do little more than list these exercises here. Pursuit of consciousness, through these and other attempts to experience, constitute the first and second

stages of the learning cycle, concrete experience and observation and reflection. In effect, these stages involve the learner probing the nature of his

experience on all levels, asking "What is this

experience like?" Some ways to do this are: 1. Engage in self-observation. 2. Investigate incongruencies, resistances, and

distortions among levels. 3. Block off the level which is most prominent,

wait for the others to emerge. 4. Develop a given experience in a "straight

line"; extension will inevitably lead to con- tact with other levels.

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1973

501

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:39:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW

5. Play off conflicts between levels. 6. Distinguish among different qualities of ex-

perience. 1

These exercises are only a few of those which can be utilized to enhance experience. Importantly for our purposes they can be learned by adminis- trators who can maximize their experience of themselves, their actions, and their environment.

Learning from this enhanced experience occurs with the third and fourth stages of the learning cycle, generating abstract generalizations and ac-

tively experimenting. The process of abstract generalization involves

generalizing from a specific administrative incident that which may be applicable to the administra- tor's experience more generally. More specifically, the administrator asks, "What is there in this

experience which may be relevant to me in other

experiences?" This stage of the learning cycle establishes the framework for experimenting and hence learning. There are some issues to be sensitive to in generalizing which enhance the

learning potential in experiments. Some of these issues are:

1. Are you working from strength or weakness? Working from strength proves performance; working from weakness offers

potential for learning. 2. Do your experiences allow for you to get

fully involved without getting over your head? The former leads to learning, the latter to frustration.

3. How close in time is personal processing of

experience to the experience itself? Time

may heal wounds, but it may also hamper learning.

4. Do your experiences lead you to new

learnings or to unlearnings? 5. Are you doing your own thing or someone

else's? Effective behavior cannot be bor- rowed; it must be generated by an individual in light of his own experience.

6. Are you fully open to what the experience presents, or open to only those elements which present you favorably?

7. Are there, in your experiences, structures which allow for undistorted feedback in a manner meaningful to you?1 2

These and other questions put to the adminis- trator can guide his generalization from his exper- ience in ways which maximize his potential for learning. That potential becomes actualized as the administrator actively experiments with his own

behavior as a test of hypotheses drawn from his

generalization. What is important here is that the administrator views each experience as a labor-

atory for learning and his own behavior as the variable. Such experiments should be active, that is, they should involve the administrator doing something. Experiments should also be specific, so

designed that feedback will be immediate and

important to the administrator's experience. The learning cycle, while an individual activity,

is greatly aided by group inputs. A reference group can expand experience, sharpen observation and reflection, challenge and channel generalizations, and provide much needed support during the the critical experimentation phase.

The administrator who masters the learning cycle through education and training - the capac- ity to learn from his experience - is not depen- dent upon external stimuli, educator/teachers, or

specific environments for his learning. He learns what is effective in the process of attempting to act effectively by attending to his own experience and learning from his own experience. Therein lies the significiance of learning from experience, the "what for" that sets it apart from continuing education.

Continuing Education for What?

Frank Sherwood, president of ASPA, observed in his inaugural address to the membership that we cannot have changing, growing organizations with- out changing, growing administrators. 3 Continu-

ing education represents one attempt to develop changing, growing administrators through educa- tion beyond their formal preparation. To the extent that continuing education relies upon its present models of learning through external condi-

tioning and learning through cognitive problem solving, administrators, and hence their organiza- tions, will be forever dependent upon someone or

something to change them and make them grow. The continuing education must be continued. The administrator does not manage his own learning, changing, and growing, and therefore exerts little control over its effectiveness or the effectiveness of his own behavior.

Where we can be certain that the determinants of effectiveness lie outside the administrator, existent models for continuing education may be highly valid. Some such areas might be highly technical content, such as computer programming. The constantly changing contexts of administra-

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1973

502

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:39:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CONTINUING EDUCATION503 503

tive environments imply, however, that the criteria of administrative effectiveness are highly contin-

gent, and in most instances it is the administrator himself who must determine effective behavior by learning from his own experience. This suggests that administrators must be the molders and

managers of their own learning. Learning from administrative experience embodies such a model in the learning cycle and further insures that education continues of its own accord, or it need not be continued.

While the above statements underscore the

major differences in the consequences of contin- ued education learning and learning from exper- ience, they do not reveal all the differences.

Helping administrators to learn from their own

experiences requires far more skill, sensitivity, and

energy of the trainer than traditional learning styles. The model approaches couseling as a

relationship for learning, as opposed to teacher- student roles. Such a role set is likely to be less familiar to administrators than the traditional, and

may, therefore, be initially confusing. Finally, helping someone to learn from his own experience generally takes more time than telling him "what he ought to know."

In sum, a move toward helping administrators learn from their administrative experiences re- quires a slower, more individualized, more theoret- ical approach than we have become accustomed to with management and organization development programs in public administration. Despite its

unfamiliarity, it is a move which we must, as a field, make. To continue to offer administrators

only educational opportunities which pursue learn-

ing through external conditioning or through cognitive problem solving is to risk diminishing administrators' independence, self-esteem, initia- tive, and ultimately their effectiveness and that of their organizations. Further, continued exclusive

offering of such learning models denies the univer- sal need of administrators- the need to learn from their own experience.

We believe the capacity for learning from one's own experience can be developed after the pattern presented in these pages. Administrators who learn from their administrative experiences learn to act

effectively and continue to learn as they continue to act. Continuing learning ought to be and can be the purpose and program of continued adult education in public administration.

Notes

1. See, for example, the program of the National Conference of the American Society for Public Administration, Los Angeles, April 1-4, 1973.

2. See R. Gagne, Conditions of Learning (New York: Holt, 1965), and 0. Mowrer, Learning Theory and Behavior (New York: Wiley, 1960).

3. William Torbert, Learning From Experience (New York: Columbia, 1973), p. 39.

4. Ibid. See also M. Merleau-Panty, The Structure of Behavior (Boston: Beacon, 1963); G. Miller, E. Galanter, and L Pribram, Plans and the Structure of Behavior (New York: Holt, 1960).

5. Ibid. See also 0. Harvey, Motivation and Social Interaction (New York: Ronald, 1963): J. Dewey, Human Nature and Conduct (New York: Holt, 1922).

6. Ibid. 7. R. Kobler, "Contemporary Learning Theory and

Human Learning," in Humanistic Viewpoints in Psychology, F. Serverin (ed.) (New York: McGraw- Hill, 1965).

8. Torbert, op. cit., p. 7. 9. D. A. Kolb, I. M. Rubin, and J. M. Mclntyre,

Organizational Psychology: An Experiential Ap- proach (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1971). See also C. Hampden-Turner, Radical Man (Cam- bridge, Mass.: Schenman, 1970).

10. Torbert, op. cit., p. 5. 11. Ibid. 12. Fritz Steele in conversation with the author on

growing from professional experience, Bethel, Maine, July 1970.

13. Frank Sherwood, ASPA National Conference, Los Angeles, April 3, 1973.

/LAXX MANPOWER MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE

Staff Training and Tchnical Ansntce

in

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Task Analysis Affirmative Action

Job Restructuring Performance Evaluation

Upward Mobility Manpower Planning Personnel System Modernization

1717 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Suite LL-5, Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 4835000

681 Market St.. Suite 523, San Francisco, California 94105 (415) 495-8550

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1973

I

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:39:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions